Fukushima on Steroids: "Japan is in the Process of Contaminating the Entire Pacific Ocean"

A life cycle study conducted by scientists Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen and Philip Smith determined that nuclear energy produces 30 percent of the
total C02 emission of a gas-burning plant, but only when the uranium has been extracted from rich soft ores. When poorer ores are used, nuclear energy
produces proportionately more C02, and if lean ores are used with .01 percent or less of uranium, actually emits more C02 than if the same amount of
electricity had been produced by burning fossil fuels directly. In other words, a dramatic increase of new nuclear power plants here and abroad and
the subsequent need to mine deeper for uranium could, in fact, increase CO2 emissions due to the finite uranium resources available.

Originally posted by TheMindWar
So your saying massive amounts of radoactivity across the planet is a good thing? Hmm, ok.

That would be you twisting words around.

I would like to see you go and survive in fukushima. We are now getting reports of "lots dying", hair and teeth loss, deformities.

Note I mention "SHOCK wave" immediate effected deaths. Those people. at least certain ones directly and acutely 'shock-waved' by massive amounts of
radiation are experiencing pain most to read this thread will never know about.

But this thread is supposedly about the ENTIRE Pacfici Ocean being "contaminated" in a way it would seem obvious by the title we must all fret and
panic and lose sleep over. I've merely pointed out how thats not how nature works.

As the resident 'anti-Big Pharm anti-cancer expert' I think I might get some thoughtful consideration in such a topic without the surely looming
insinuations of me being some 'pro-nuclear waste establishment shill', if there even is such a thing.

As for chernobyl, mammals are born deformed there, you have been watching to much MSM my freind.

Go watch the documentaries I listed. You can have them on screen in 20 minutes using bitorrent. All of you, go watch the first one and please come
back and say the lead researcher there isnt the real deal. The place has become such a nature santuary he stands deserate in trying to keep the
massive site from turning into Eurasia's nuclear waste dump pit.

There are endangered species that are both introduced and have appeared spontaneously there that it stands as one of their last refuges. And the fact
that over 1,000 collected mice haven't had any tumors yet settings off geiger counters should say something. I mean if animals don't adapt, these
creatures they show live on video wouldn't be able to move let alone put up a fight.

GO WATCH THE VIDEOS: They show the 17+ packs of apex predator wolves, and numerous apex predator eagles that carry on there. You gonna cite some bland
'article' or 'report' and trump that over video documentation of thriving moose, wolves, mice, deer, wild horses and so on??

I remember how people went nuts over the BP oil mess... and I'll be damned if EVERY possible report or article that didn't speak total and utter end
of the world doom and gloom was shouted down over HARD VIDEO PROOF (of the yes obvious IMMEDIATE effects) of the end of the world. Oh, but this video
showing the ZOOLOGISTS who work there every day many for over a decade go out in the field where the radiation is literally 1,000 the normal
background levels without any breathing protection... ye tthey live on just like the mice there do whom aren't merely 'in the area' but the things
they eat are loaded with radiation and they themselves trip geiger counters.

In contrast, the 2009 report, “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment”, published by the New York Academy
of Sciences, comes to a very different conclusion. The three scientist authors – Alexey V Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V Nesterenko
– provide in its pages a translated synthesis and compilation of hundreds of scientific articles on the effects of the Chernobyl disaster that have
appeared in Slavic language publications over the past 20 years. They estimate the number of deaths attributable to the Chernobyl meltdown at about
980,000.

Those aren't absurd numbers. Not at all:

The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that, among the hundreds of millions of people living in broader geographical areas, there will be
50,000 excess cancer cases resulting in 25,000 excess cancer deaths.[12] For this broader group, the 2006 TORCH report predicts 30,000 to 60,000
excess cancer deaths,[13] and a Greenpeace report puts the figure at 200,000 or more. The Russian publication Chernobyl, which has received criticism
for its methodology and sourcing, concludes that among the billions of people worldwide who were exposed to radioactive contamination from the
disaster, nearly a million premature cancer deaths occurred between 1986 and 2004.[14] en.wikipedia.org...

ESTIMATE? By what data?

In the aftermath of the accident, 237 people suffered from acute radiation sickness (ARS), of whom 31 died within the first three months.[10][93]
Most of the victims were fire and rescue workers trying to bring the accident under control, who were not fully aware of how dangerous the exposure to
radiation in the smoke was. Whereas, in the World Health Organization's 2006 report of the Chernobyl Forum expert group on the 237 emergency workers
who were diagnosed with ARS, ARS was identified as the cause of death for 28 of these people within the first few months after the disaster.

There were no further deaths identified, in the general population affected by the disaster, as being caused by ARS. Of the 72,000 Russian Emergency
Workers being studied, 216 non-cancer deaths are attributed to the disaster, between 1991 and 1998. The latency period for solid cancers caused by
excess radiation exposure is 10 or more years; thus at the time of the WHO report being undertaken, the rates of solid cancer deaths were no greater
than the general population. Some 135,000 people were evacuated from the area, including 50,000 from Pripyat.

Now if we were talking about GLOBAL WARMING doomsday 2012'esque end of the world scenarios thent he UN is the ultimate, most undisputable source that
all truth is or ever will be derived from, but the UN's WHO report on Chernobyl is "brain washing" "propaganda"??

Which is it?

Meanwhile I don't care about supposed estimates, by the national academy of whoever, who might just have political reasons for being against nuclear
power as a bias for their findings.

I care for any of you who would respond to me to actually watch the video documentation of the life there and then comment.

Originally posted by TheMindWar
lol, contaminating every atom is not what is going on here, lol. To contaminate the whole ocean does not mean every H20 will be radioactive. think
about it this way, radioactive dust in the air doesn't mean that the air is radioactive, it means the "dust" in the air is.

What this means is, there will be nowhere in the ocean that is free from radioactive material, (i.e at the macro level). Basically, there will be no
life in the ocean free from radioactivity. Hope that helps you understand whats going on here. Its not the water that becomes radioactive, its the
contaminated material "in" the water that is.

Ok, well, that's a LOT of dust to contaminate, what was it thousands of cubic kilometers?!?!? Nevermind that gravity tends to sink in water, and much
of the ocean floor is so deep that the animals that are there it could kill many of the species and we wouldn't even have known they existed, in all
likelihood.

It begs the question of how are there people still left in the eurasian continent, or pacific islands, after all of the weapons testing of the USSR,
China, Pakistan, India not to mention that pesky historical example we have to modern Fukishima, being the Cherobyl disaster?

And in light of those already apprently 'superhuman' pacific islanders, how about the 300'ish nukes (including hydrogen bombs) that the US lit off in
the pacific (including in the atmosphere and in SPACE), and the I think it was well over 400 nukes they lit off in Nevada.

Now this sin't to say some people might not have died sooner from all of that, but I've yet to see any data to suggest that Fukushima ALONE surpasses
every human based release of nuclear materials over the past 60 years, combined, enough to warrant such mass hysteria based threads such as this.

provide in its pages a translated synthesis and compilation of hundreds of scientific articles on the effects of the Chernobyl disaster that have
appeared in Slavic language publications over the past 20 years.

Why not tell the truth -- Willful Ignorance!

The report citing just under 1 million deaths from Chernobyl is based on new data translated from Slavic.

Further, as Prof Dimitro Godzinsky, of the Ukranian National Academy of Sciences, states in his introduction to the report: “Against this
background of such persuasive data some defenders of atomic energy look specious as they deny the obvious negative effects of radiation upon
populations. In fact, their reactions include almost complete refusal to fund medical and biological studies, even liquidating government bodies that
were in charge of the ‘affairs of Chernobyl’. Under pressure from the nuclear lobby, officials have also diverted scientific personnel away from
studying the problems caused by Chernobyl.”

She called the situation in Japan was an “absolute disaster” that could be many, many times worse than Chernobyl. Dr Helen Caldicott raised
the possibility of cataclysmic loss of life and suggested the emergency could be far more severe than Chernobyl. “The situation is very grim and
not just for the Japanese people,” said Dr Caldicott. “If both reactors blow then the whole of the Northern Hemisphere may be affected,” she
said. “Only one reactor blew at Chernobyl and it was only 3 months old, with new cores holding relatively little radiation; these ones have been
operating for 40 years and would hold about 30 times more radiation than Chernobyl’s.” Dr Caldicott cited a report from the New York Academy of
Sciences, which said that over 1 million people have died as a direct result of the 1986 melt-down at Chernobyl, mostly from cancer. She said
authorities had attempted to “hush up” the full scale of the Chernobyl disaster. The official 2005 figure from the International Atomic Energy
Agency was just 4,000 fatalities. The NYAS is a credible 200 year-old scientific institution. Their précis of the report is as follows: This is
a collection of papers translated from the Russian with some revised and updated contributions. Written by leading authorities from Eastern Europe,
the volume outlines the history of the health and environmental consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. According to the authors, official discussions
from the International Atomic Energy Agency and associated United Nations’ agencies (e.g. the Chernobyl Forum reports) have largely downplayed or
ignored many of the findings reported in the Eastern European scientific literature and consequently have erred by not including these assessments.
When asked whether the disaster in Japan could be, say, 30 times worse than Chernobyl, Dr Caldicott said it could be even most catastrophic than that.
“It could be much, much, worse than that,” said Dr Caldicott. “This could be a diabolical catastrophe—we’ll just have to wait and
see.”

What really aggravates me though is that they say the levels of radiation are low. You know, no immediate harm, no. But if you inhale or ingest
these radioactive particles of Strontium 90, Cesium 137, radioactive Iodine, etc., you won’t get Leukemia for five years. So there is no immediate
danger ‘per se’. Immediate danger means those poor fellows in the reactor vessels trying to do something, and they’re dead men walking. Many of
them are going to be dead within two weeks of acute radiation illness. So they are in immediate danger. Everyone else is in long-term danger of
getting cancer, or Leukemia, or having their genes mutated in their testicles or ovaries to affect future generations. AS: Yes, and we saw after
Chernobyl the way that people were shunned who came from there. People didn’t want to marry them. People didn’t even want them around. They
thought they might have radioactivity on their clothes. We are going to see that again with these Fukushima evacuees, who may never be able to go
home. What do you think their situation is? HC: Well, it’s so ironic, and tragic because the ‘Hibakusha’ in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were in
exactly the same position. The Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission which was run by the U.S., who dropped the bombs, studied these people voraciously to
find out what happened to them, because they were the guinea pigs – but they never got any treatment. And people shunned them. They got cancers in
large numbers. No one wants to marry them because their genes may have been affected and mutated. So at Chernobyl it’s the same, and here again we
have another absolute disaster which if it really is ongoing, it’s going to contaminate the whole of the Northern Hemisphere, as did Chernobyl. AS:
In fact, we’ve received radiation here in British Columbia [Canada] and along the West Coast. But it’s also been measured in Iceland, having
arrived from Fukushima… HC: Oh really! AS: Now in very low amounts they say, but they can find that signature so it is moving around the northern
hemisphere as we speak… HC: Well, when they say low amount, you know, you need one millionth of a gram of plutonium inhaled into your lung, to give
you cancer. They are measuring the external gamma radiation, running around with Geiger counters. But that doesn’t give you any indication at all of
the kind of isotopes which make up the radiation that they are measuring. They don’t know what they are talking about.

I do not know very much about all this nuclear stuff, but possibly the radiation in Europe maybe from the 1966 Palomares incident?
en.wikipedia.org...
I know Lithuania is a bit away from Spain, but possibly that is a designated disposal site... Not to sound bad, but when you have more money than
another country- If they want money bad enough they will be a dump. The only reason I do not think that fukishima is going to destroy us all is-
mostly because some stupid things have been done with nuclear weapons, and other nuclear fueled vehicles (like submarines). Some of which have
resulted in accidents. The ocean has been very good at absorbing and dispersing our beau-boes. Then again even when things are thought to be safe- you
have inhabitants of bikini island, who are getting cancer off co-co-nuts. either way, nuclear power is a fact in the modern would and the only way it
will go away is if all of man kind does. We may not personally see the benefits on a daily basis, and only take notice if we believe doom is immanent,
but nuclear radiation (can be natural), nuclear medicine (saves lives), and nuclear meltdowns (unfortunately if the possibility is there- can and do
happen). It is not frequently that it damages us in a harmful way- it's a give take relationship.

With the post limits in place these days, when I try to change anything in your post the whole thing deletes.

But it got me thinking, you havent directly addressed my posts yet. Instead you keep mentioning "slavic language" "papers", when the incident happened
in Ukraine... while approx 60% of the actual fallout landed in Belarus.

You might actually take a real good look set forth by the historical example (of any given ordeal) before deciding how fateful something is longterm.
In this case it would be Chernobyl: en.wikipedia.org...

You can feel free to enter the discussion page behind that entry and argue against actual experts. Enjoy.

Ok, all that out of the way... if somebody could actually post some solid numbers we might colletively take a crack shot at trying to determine what
the Fukishima mess might increase the already existing normal background radiation levels of the Pacific....

The US 'only' lit off 225 nuke & hydrogen bombs in the US & the Pacific.

I source this from my old book "They Never Knew", which I've referenced online in the past in bitching about nuke bombs.

Now there are problems with nuke power plants, most of which can be fixed or reveresed... and I'll promise to get to... whether or not anyone can
describe a better world for the past 50 years using any percentile based equivalents of any other power source.

I merely ask because I don't know what other energy outcome would have the 'world' we know close to where it is.

If you intend to push wind turbine theories we'll need some preliminary cost-vs-production numbers to try to get this rolling with, if anybody is
interested at least...

Just so people know the intel hub is known for putting out fearmongering and backing famous fear youtuber channels that spout out fauls information. I
learned about this when the BP oil spill happened, they backed a number of different fear mongers that said it was raining corexit all over the world,
that the oil spill could never be stopped, that the jet stream in the gulf had stopped and many others.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Ok, all that out of the way... if somebody could actually post some solid numbers we might colletively take a crack shot at trying to determine what
the Fukishima mess might increase the already existing normal background radiation levels of the Pacific....

it's hard to say what effects it will have on the ocean itself so i think you will have to wait several hundred years for that answer. water also is
an excellent shield against radiation so unless it can move back into the atmosphere from surface water, the radiation would only be a concern through
bio-magnification and bio-accumulation through the food chain.

interesting note on some recent articles this isn't looking good at all.

2,566,720Bq/㎡ in Edogawa ku Tokyo

9,488 Bq/Kg of cesium (134 + 137) was measured in Edogawa ku in Tokyo. It equals to 2,566,720Bq/㎡.

In the secondary evacuation area in Belarus, it was 555,000 ~ 1,480,000 Bq/m2 of cesium 137.

Even if you consider the data of Tokyo includes cesium 134, still it can be near the maximum limit of the secondary evacuation area in
Belarus.

This is where the world as a whole needs to put down the weapons, put their brains together and figure out what to do to keep this disaster from
getting any worse. If it isn't far to late already.

We have the ability to create all of this technology, so we should be able to work together to fix things
and make them right.

Of course we could pray to a God to save us or we can wait for the aliens make it all better.

*************
Unfortunately I feel it is already too late. Its only a matter of time before reactor #4 and its fuel pool collapse. WHEN that happens we are toast
in the Northern Hemisphere.
This issue is so much worse than we all know.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.